As is well known, Ōgai Mori made translations from a wide range of literatures, including 19 works in all from Russian Literature. These Russian works are, in general, short stories and most of them are works of already forgotten writers. Moreover, they were translated from German versions, not directly from Russian. This is why only a few scholars are interested in these translated stories.

　But I believe that it is very important to compare these works with the Russian originals and German translations to understand Ōgai’s originalities and translating techniques. I attempt here a basic survey in comparative studies in order to appreciate Ōgai’s translated works. I shall also try to make clear his attitude towards and interest in Russian literature.

　I shall deal with his two works—“Warai” and “Senzamani”. The original Russian titles are《C_Mex (Smiech) 》and 《Hочью (Notch’ju)》 . The German translations are entitled “Lachen“ and “Familie Ohnehand“.

　Some conclusions from this comparative study are : ① „Familie Ohnehand” is not a very good translation. Even Ōgai himself noticed it while he was translating it into Japanese. Why is it an unsuccessful translation ? It is partly because there was not enough time to translate it (only three weeks), and partly because there was probably some accident at the printing house. ②It is often said that Ōgai helped his sister Kimiko Koganei in translating “Prinzessin Mary“ into Japanese, the title of which was “Yokusenki”. But considering usually high skill at translating, I am inclined to think that his help, if any, played a very small part in his sister’s translation.

　Nous essayons ici d’éclaircir le sens idéologique de l’homicide dans la littérature moderne， choisissant comme exemples “L’ETRANGER” (Albert Camus, 1942) et “LE CRIME DE HAN” （Naoya Shiga，1913). Ces deux oeuvres littéraires ont un sujet commun : l’homicide involontaire et irrationel. Nous voulons comparer les deux crimes pour trouver des idées derrière eux.

　La ressemblance que nous trouvons entre les deux homicides littéraires est qu’ils ont été produits de la fatigue extrême du corps de chaque criminel. Surtout est-elle remarquable lorsqu’on compare les descriptions du crime :

　　　　　Tout mon être s’est tendu et j’ai crispé ma main sur le revolver. La gâchette acédé, J’ai touché le ventre poli de la crosse et c’est là, dans le bruit à la fois sec et assourdissant, que tout a commencé. J’ai secoué la sueur et le soleil. (“L’ETRANGER”)

et

　　　　　　j’ai eu comme une sorte d’étourdissement. Pourtant, j’ai fini par lancer — de toutes mes forces — le couteau que j’avais dans la main, au jugé, sans voir la cible, dans le noir pour ainsi dire. (LE CRIME DE HAN”）

Dans touts les deux cas, le crime s’est produit comme si le corps du meurtrier avait marché tout indépendant de sa volonté. Et, à notre avis, cette ressemblance signifie le point de vue commun aux deux écrivains : la prédominance du corps sur toute chose.

　Pourtant, nous ne pouvons pas ne pas remarquer la différence d’expression entre les deux écrivains; Camus essaie avant tout d’exprimer le crime comme une révolte contre toute valorisation sociale, tandis que Shiga l’exprime comme une manifestation d’un être transcendant qui domine le corps humain. Nous supposons que cette différence dérive de celle de leurs civilisations.

　Or, en ce qui concerne des rapports entre Camus et Shiga, nous pouvons dire que c’est par l’intermédiaire de Nietzsche que les deux puissent s’associer; on sait trop bien l’influence de ce philosophe allemand sur Camus; et l’écrivain japonais, dans sa jeunesse, a trouvé certaine affinité entre ses idées et celles de Nietzsche telles que :

　　　　　　Le corps est raison — une grande raison. (“AINSI PARLAIT ZARATHOUSTRA”）

　The Little Dream (written by J. Galsworthy 1911) was translated by Takeo Arishima, and appeared in Shirakaba, a monthly periodical in March 1912. Comparing the translation with the original, I can find five intended alterated parts and one deleted part. By this alteration, Seelchen, heroine in this work, was renewed. Eventually, Seelchen described as an Excellent man, was transformed into an alienated man.

　On the other hand, from January 1911 to March 1913, Arishima had been publishing serially A Glimpse o f One Woman, one of the masterpieces, in Shirakaba. And the author had been shaping Tazuko, heroine of this work, as a new typed woman.

　I can find the two principal common points in the process of describing two heroines, Seelchen and Tazuko. (1) Their tender passion consists of the quarrel between love and hatred. (2) They were described as a rebel and an alienated man.

　 Since the Meiji era, when English literature was introduced to Japan, Cardinal Newman was received by a wide range of scholars, in the fields of English literature, theology, philosophy, education, music and religion.

　When we review the history of Newman’s reception in Japan, from the Meiji era to the first decade of the Showa era, we find that Shoyo Tsubouchi (1859-1935), in his History of English Literature, written in 1901，was the first person to introduce Newman in this country.

　Bin Ueda (1874-1916), who was a professor of Western literature at Kyoto University from 1908 to 1916, spoke of Newman in his lectures, praising the artistry and scholarship of Newman’s prose. He considered Newman as the most perfect English prose writer, and recommended his prose as a good example for imitation.

　Masahisa Uemura (1857-1925), a Protestant pastor and founder of a Protestant seminary (the present Tokyo Shingaku Daigaku), translated Newman’s poem “Lead, Kindly Light” into Japanese. He should get credit for having popularized the song among Anglicans and Protestants.

　Dr. Takeshi Saito (1887-) was greatly moved by Uemura’s frequent citation of Newman in his sermons. In his school days at Tokyo University, Dr. Saito’s love of Newman was further strengthened by Professor John Laurence (1850-1916). Though Dr. Saito wants Newman to be remembered as the poet of “Lead, Kindly Light” and The Dream of Gerontius, he feels that Newman’s poetry can not compare with John Keble’s The Christian Year.

　Dr. Kenji Ishida (1890-1979), a student of Bin Ueda at Kyoto University, was the first seriously recognized scholar of Newman in the field of English literature in Japan. Dr. Ishida considered Newman the most classical prose writer in the nineteenth century, and saw his style and his terse and forcible expression as incomparable. Dr. Ishida felt that in the chaos and drift of modern thought, Newman should be given more attention. Finally, Professor Bunsho Jugaku considers Dr. Ishida’s Newman published in 1936, as the best critical biography of Newman in this country.